Welcome to Pax Judaica

Read carefully what this guy is saying; Israel is the only power [aligned with America, i.e. not Russia or China] that is willing, able, and has [done] struck down "evil regimes" in recent memory. This by definition is the foundation for the Pax Judaica model.

Note the unfolding: Pax UK - Pax Americana - and Pax Judaica.


Jpost.com:

The agreement reached between the US and Russia for the destruction of chemical weapons in the possession of the Assad regime is fraught with difficulty and danger and, in the best case scenario, would likely end up with a token show of disarmament, Col. Richard Kemp, former commander of British forces in Afghanistan, told The Jerusalem Post on Sunday.

Speaking to the Post by phone, Kemp, who also served in the UK’s Joint Intelligence Committee and Cabinet Office Briefing Room, said: “I think it’s extremely difficult to do something like this during an active conflict, during a war. I think it’ll take a very large amount of time, with a significant amount of military protection, so that the inspectors can be as safe as they can be. That aspect will present huge challenges. Which country, first of all, will provide the scientists who will take these risks and the military forces to back them up? It’s a very dangerous situation.”

Kemp observed that there is a wide variety of factions in Syria, including regime forces and jihadists, meaning that it would be difficult to send weapons inspectors to the country.

“Secondly, to get verification in this kind of situation, I would say, is impossible,” he stated. “It would be very easy for President Assad to hide or remove out of the country significant quantities of chemical weapons.

Crisis in Syria - full JPost.com coverage

What we might end up seeing is a token show of disarmament. I don’t think it is realistically feasible.”

In turn, it would end up harming regional – and global – security, the former military commander warned.

Assad’s position would be strengthened by a more positive international stance towards him, “combined with very active Russian support and American collusion with that support,” Kemp said. Iran’s position, too, would be strengthened significantly, he continued, as the value of American deterrence “appears to be degraded as a result of this, and Iran’s own position is obviously strengthened by what will be its closer relations with Russia.”

This spells bad news from Israel’s perspective, Kemp said, adding nonetheless that “Israel appears to be the only reliable power in the region. America’s power and American deterrence is reduced. Israel remains the one reliable power that the world can count on to intervene if the situation gets too dangerous.”

He noted the three times that Israel, according to foreign media reports, intervened in Syria to prevent the transfer of advanced weapons, and the alleged 2007 Israeli air strike on Syria’s nuclear project.

“It’s that sort of action we need to be prepared to do,” Kemp said. “If Israel hadn’t struck Syria’s nuclear project, the situation now could be very different. We could be trying to deal with nuclear-armed Syria, which would be an impossibility. Israel is showing itself to be the only reliable power.”

The UK and the US have, over the past few weeks, “demonstrated their complete lack of resolve to do the right thing when it’s needed. It’s all very well speaking and posturing, but when the chips are down and it’s time to put their money where their mouth is, both the UK and US have shown there’s no will,” he said, pointing to a negative effect on world security.

Public opinion in the UK and US is too focused on what happened in Iraq and Afghanistan, “particularly, Iraq,” he added. “Many people are not able to look at this situation as a different situation to Iraq.”

In the UK, a wide part of public opinion is influenced by a fear of militant Islam and the desire to pursue short-term, low-risk goals, at the expense of ignoring wider risks, Kemp said.

This means Israel has rulership in its Land. From Erev Rav yes, and they shall yield to God in the end, but in this point in history, only Israel has the God given ability to be Pax Judaica [Pax anything] in this dor. The Geulah begins on this premise; all we can do is live each day with emunah that this is indeed it, the alternative would be an evil unheard of. The pieces are there, we are to read the mazal of each moment - the mazal being the kabbalistic perfection coming into our world which goes 100% in- face of "non-Jewish" mazal.

For context of Israel today and the imprecations  for the Church, read what the Pope has to say about Israel.

Pope Francis has praised Jews for keeping their faith despite the Holocaust and other “terrible trials” throughout history, and reaffirmed Judaism as the “holy root” of Christianity. In a letter, published on the front page of La Repubblica Italian newspaper, the Pope writes that "since Vatican Council II, we have rediscovered that the Jewish people are still for us the holy root from which Jesus germinated". 

As archbishop of Buenos Aires, Bergoglio had celebrated Rosh Hashana in local synagogues, he had voiced solidarity with Jewish victims of Iranian terrorism and co-written a book with a rabbi, Avraham Skorka. He attended a commemoration of Kristallnacht, the wave of Nazi attacks against Jews in November 1938. But as this new letter shows, one of the grave dangers in the Vatican's dialogue with Judaism is the Church's attempt to drive a wedge between the “good” and docile Jews of the Diaspora and the “bad” and arrogant Jews of Israel. Pope Francis has never addressed the Israelis in his messages, nor has he openly defended the Jewish State since he was elected by the college of the cardinals. It seems that there is no room for stubborn, faithful Zionists in the Pope's lenient smile.

 In his speeches, Jewish national aspirations are ignored, if not denigrated. The definitive proof is in Washington. It seems that there is no room for stubborn, faithful Zionists in the Pope's lenient smile. While the Pope was distributing that letter, in a new event co-sponsored by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Catholic University of America was hosting a special conference about “religious freedom and human rights issues in the Holy Land”. 

The speakers included Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, archbishop emeritus of Washington, D.C., Jessica Montell, executive director of B’Tselem anti-Israel group, and Mustafa Barghouti, the prominent member of the Palestinian Legislative Council. Cardinal McCarrick said that “the expansion of Israeli settlements into occupied territories provokes violence”, in a self-evident justification of Arab terrorism. Montell, who accepted money from BDS, added that “settlement expansion is a primary source of human rights violations for Palestinians” and that “human rights violations are inherent to a prolonged military occupation”. "When you live under occupation, you come to accept things you shouldn't accept,” Lubna Alzaroo, a Muslim graduate of Bethlehem University and Fullbright scholar studying at the University of Washington, said at the D.C. event of the Catholic Church. Among the organizations invited by the Catholic bishops there was also the Society of St. Yves, which charges "Israeli colonization, occupation and apartheid" and works for "the Palestinian refugees’ rights to return to their homes and places of origin". 

The Society of St. Yves shares also the "Nakba” ideology, the “catastrophe”, as the Arabs call the date of the creation of the State of Israel in 1948. While the Pope was penning his letter about Jesus, the US' highest Catholic political body was giving a platform to the boycotters of Israel, it was calling for the indefensible-for-Israel partition of the holy land and it was exculpating the Palestinian Arab for their jihad. 

 The Vatican, as always happened in the past, will be silent during the next "terrible trials" for the Jewish people, if they occur, should it be Iranian nuclear or Arab terrorism. When Pope Francis was elected, a media outlet asked me to comment. 

My reply was: "I hope the next Pope will avoid the ecumenical mistakes of his predecessors, he will address the challenge of political Islam and understand the Jewish revolution of returning to the land after Auschwitz. Otherwise, any Jewish-Catholic dialogue will be empty, or worse, it will be a show for hypocrites". 

 Was I right to be skeptical?

Torah says Hashem takes over in the End of Days. Couple that with our old friend "novelty" - Things are seeming ever novel, no?

last moments of '73 anyone?

Read more »

Your Move Bibi - Bluffa

In the hearts of man this is about Iran; In the heart of Hashem this is about Geulah.

From the Mouth of God I heard two. [מפי הגבורה]


YahooNews.com:

If President Barack Obama has disappointed Syrian rebels by deferring to Congress before bombing Damascus, he has also dismayed the United States' two main allies in the Middle East.

Israel and Saudi Arabia have little love for each other but both are pressing their mutual friend in the White House to hit President Bashar al-Assad hard. And both do so with one eye fixed firmly not on Syria but on their common adversary - Iran.

Israel's response to Obama's surprise move to delay or even possibly cancel air strikes made clear that connection: looking soft on Assad after accusing him of killing hundreds of people with chemical weapons may embolden his backers in Tehran to develop nuclear arms, Israeli officials said. And if they do, Israel may strike Iran alone, unsure Washington can be trusted.

Neither U.S. ally is picking a fight with Obama in public. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday that the nation was "serene and self-confident"; Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal simply renewed a call to the "international community" to halt Assad's violence in Syria.

But the Saudi monarchy, though lacking Israel's readiness to attack Iran, can share the Jewish state's concern that neither may now look with confidence to Washington to curb what Riyadh sees as a drive by its Persian rival to dominate the Arab world.

Last year, Obama assured Israelis that he would "always have Israel's back". Now Netanyahu is reassuring them they can manage without uncertain U.S. protection against Iran, which has called for Israel's destruction but denies developing nuclear weapons.

"Israel's citizens know well that we are prepared for any possible scenario," the hawkish prime minister said. "And Israel's citizens should also know that our enemies have very good reasons not to test our power and not to test our might."

That may not reassure a U.S. administration which has tried to steer Netanyahu away from unilateral action against Iran that could stir yet more chaos in the already explosive Middle East.

Israel's state-run Army Radio was more explicit: "If Obama is hesitating on the matter of Syria," it said, "Then clearly on the question of attacking Iran, a move that is expected to be far more complicated, Obama will hesitate much more - and thus the chances Israel will have to act alone have increased."

Israelis contrast the "red line" Netanyahu has set for how close Iran may come to nuclear weapons capability before Israel strikes with Obama's "red line" on Assad's use of chemical weapons - seemingly passed without U.S. military action so far.

"HEAD OF THE SNAKE"

Saudi Arabia, like Israel heavily dependent on the United States for arms supplies, is engaged in a historic confrontation with Iran for regional influence - a contest shaped by their leading roles in the rival Sunni and Shi'ite branches of Islam.

Riyadh is a prime backer of Sunni rebels fighting Assad, whose Alawite minority is a Shi'ite offshoot. It sees toppling Assad as checking Iran's ambition not just in Syria but in other Arab states including the Gulf, where it mistrusts Shi'ites in Saudi Arabia itself and in neighboring Bahrain, Yemen and Iraq.

Saudi King Abdullah's wish for U.S. action against Iran was memorably contained in leaked U.S. diplomatic cables, including one in which a Saudi envoy said the monarch wanted Washington to "cut off the head of the snake" to end Tehran's nuclear threat.

Disappointment with Obama's hesitation against Assad came through on Sunday in the Saudi foreign minister's remarks to the Arab League in Cairo, where he said words were no longer enough.

Riyadh and its allies in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) risk ending up empty-handed in their latest push for U.S. backing in their campaign to rein in Iran, said Sami al-Faraj, a Kuwaiti analyst who advises the GCC on security matters:

"The idea of a punishment for a crime has lost its flavor. We are on the edge of the possibility that military action may not be conducted," he said. "Congress, for sure, ... will attach conditions to what is already going to be a limited strike. At the end, we as Gulf allies, may end up with nothing."

Israel does not share the Saudi enthusiasm for the Syrian rebel cause, despite its concern about Assad's role as a link between Iran and Lebanese and Palestinian enemies. The presence in rebel ranks of Sunni Islamist militants, some linked to al Qaeda, worries the Jewish state - though Riyadh, too, is keen to curb al Qaeda, which calls the royal family American stooges.

EGYPTIAN LESSONS

Saudi and Israeli support for U.S. air strikes in response to Assad's alleged use of poison gas scarcely stands out less amid a global clamor of reproach for Damascus. But the recent Egyptian crisis saw them more distinctly making common cause in lobbying Washington - since their preference for Egypt's army over elected Islamists was at odds with much of world opinion.

That, too, reflects shared anxieties about the strength of Islamic populism and about Iran, which found a more sympathetic ear in Cairo after the election of President Mohamed Mursi.

Israeli political commentators used terms such as "betrayal" and "bullet in the back from Uncle Sam" when Obama abandoned loyal ally Hosni Mubarak during the popular uprising of 2011.

While some Western leaders voiced unease at the army's overthrow of Mursi in July and bloody crackdown on his Muslim Brotherhood, in Israel even Obama's mild rebuke to the generals - delaying delivery of four warplanes to Egypt - caused "raised eyebrows" of disapproval, an official there said.

A "gag order" from Netanyahu kept that quiet, however, as Israel's military kept open the communications with Egypt's armed forces, not least over militant attacks near their desert border, in a manner that has been the bedrock of the U.S.-brokered peace treaty binding Israel and Egypt since 1979.

Unusually, it was Saudi Arabia which was the more vocally critical of Washington's allies over its Egypt policy.

As U.S. lawmakers toyed with holding back aid to the new military-backed government, Riyadh and its Gulf allies poured in many more billions in aid and loans to Cairo.

And Saudi Arabia told Washington defiantly that it would make up any shortfall if the United States dared to turn off the taps: "To those who have declared they are stopping aid to Egypt or are waving such a threat, the Arab and Muslim nations ... will not shy away from offering a helping hand to Egypt," foreign minister Prince Saud said last month.

DISCREET DIPLOMACY

More quietly, Israel has been engaged in direct discussions with the White House, urging Obama not to waver in support of Egypt's military and saying it is time to act on Syria.

An official briefed on U.S.-Israeli discussions said Israeli intercepts of Syrian communications were used by Obama administration officials in making their public case that Assad was behind the August 21 gas attacks and must be penalized.

Netanyahu, whose frosty rapport with Obama blossomed into a display of harmony on the president's visit to Israel in March, has ordered his ministers not to criticize Obama publicly after the president's decision to take the Syrian issue to Congress.

A government source said the prime minister told his cabinet on Sunday: "We are in the middle of an ongoing event. It is not over and there are sensitive and delicate issues at play.

"There is no room here for individual comments," he said. "I'm asking you not to behave irresponsibly when it comes to our ally, just so you can grab a fleeting headline."

That did stop Tzachi Hanegbi, a Netanyahu confidant who sits on parliament's defense committee, complaining on Army Radio that Obama had delivered further proof to Iran - and North Korea - that "there is no enthusiasm in the world to deal with their ongoing defiance regarding nuclear weaponry".

"To us it says one thing: ... in the words of our sages: 'If I am not for myself, then who is?'"

Israel clearly hopes still that Congress will give Obama the green light for strikes against Assad but is also likely to be wary of deploying its own lobbying power among lawmakers.

That risks being counter-productive and, in any case, the president has made clear that threats to Israel from Syrian chemical weapons are among his own arguments for war.

Concern in Washington over a go-it-alone Israeli strike on Iran are still strong; Israel is unlikely to use the nuclear warheads it is assumed to possess but any strike on its distant and populous enemy would have unpredictable consequences.

As a result, U.S. leaders have beaten a path to Jerusalem - Obama himself in March but also Secretary of State John Kerry several times, relaunching talks with the Palestinians in the process, and General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, who made his third visit to Israel last month.

Gadi Shamni, an Israeli military attache in the United States until last year, said that on the Iranian issue, "there were times when we were in the same book, then the same chapter.

"Right now we are on the same page. There is a lot of flow of intelligence and views and understanding."

MILITANT THREAT

For all the unease that Israel has about Syria's rebels, who have at times fired into the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, it is pushing hard against Assad now after learning to live with the Syrian leader and his father over the past 40 years. One Israeli official said the message from Netanyahu was clear:

"There is a man in nominal control of Syria who is using chemical weapons against civilians. That has to be stopped."

That sentiment is echoed in Riyadh. Abdullah al-Askar, chairman of the foreign affairs committee in the Shoura Council, said that U.S. strikes should aim to end Assad's rule.

Askar, who said he was speaking in a personal capacity, told Reuters: "If the attack is just a punishment to show that the international community will not stand for chemical attacks, Assad will just remain in his place and do his bloody work.

"The second scenario is to finish the business."

Mustafa Alani, a Gulf analyst with good connections to Saudi officials, said the kingdom was also warning Washington that a failure to attack Assad would benefit their common enemy al Qaeda: "No action will boost the extremist position," he said, explaining that rebel despair at U.S. inaction on Syria would push more fighters to switch allegiance to Islamist militants.

Paraphrasing what he said was a Saudi argument, Alani said: "Without a punishment of the regime, extremists will enjoy wider support and attract more moderate fighters."

Riyadh already shares rebel frustrations with the shortage of U.S. military aid reaching Syria, despite Obama's commitment in June to step up assistance after poison gas was first used.

A senior U.S. official spoke of a "stable relationship" with Riyadh "on core national security areas". But the official also conceded: "While we do not agree on every issue, when we have different perspectives we have honest and open discussions."

As with Israel over Iran, those are likely to continue.

Robert Jordan, U.S. ambassador to Riyadh in 2001-03, said intelligence chief Prince Bandar bin Sultan and ambassador to Washington Adel Jubeir had been "very outspoken" in their belief the rebels that can be trusted and should get military backing.

Obama denies seeking the "regime change" Riyadh wants. But Jordan added: "It doesn't mean they won't keep pushing for it."

The Vilna Gaon says Geulah can be sure to come with 3 Moadim: Times, People, and Activities.

Here we are in 5773, The players are here, and the actions are accountable.

To me, things are going on, Hashem is in control as last week's Haftorah explains, "Who is this that comes from Edom?"

Any lag in blogging should be assumed nothing is going on, to the contrary, it means everything is going on! It's just that this is the story, and I'm following as most people are. I will continue to blog moments that seem crucial to God's [apparent] Plan.

Also keep in mind what is happening on the mainland; America is taking steps to legalize marijuana as soon as Thursday - something to keep in mind.

This song [and its message] used to mean something; Now all I hear in the message is that one day this will be the message to Jews WorldWide to realize, "We're Comin' to Israel."

Read more »

The New American States Of The USA

It seems America is about to crusade into the Middle East; they say it is over the usage of weapons of mass destruction [again]. If this historic message is to be properly delivered, you can then say goodbye to Iran's aspirations as well. In fact, this is looking much like Gog Magog - Prophetic accuracy as well.

JPost.com:



The United States has gone beyond gunboat diplomacy in its preparations for military intervention in the Syrian conflict.

With allies Britain and France, the US has now concluded with “little doubt” that chemical weapons were used by the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad against civilians on a mass scale in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta last week, killing over 1,000, including many children.

The resulting escalation in rhetoric from Western powers has been swift and dramatic.

An appetite now exists for action within the White House that did not exist before. And with virtually no dissenting voices in the US Congress from either party, President Barack Obama looks poised to order a strike within the coming days.

Anything short of military action, at this point, might prove more politically costly than any negative consequences resulting from a strike that will inevitably be held against the president.

“They haven’t crossed the Rubicon, but they’re in the boats,” says Jeffrey White, a defense fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “They’re clearing away all the obstacles to military action. The question now is what scale it is going to be.”

A red line has been drawn by British leader David Cameron – and repeated by his foreign minister, William Hague – framing military action in a context much larger than the entrenched and devastating conflict unfolding in Syria itself.

Action is required from the international community, they say, to send an historic message to the world that the use of weapons of mass destruction will not be tolerated in this day and age.

Photos and video of dead children piled next to one another have been running on broadcast stations worldwide, as have the ensuing threats from 10 Downing Street and the White House.

The Obama administration’s actions – including its quick dismissal of Syria’s decision to grant access to a UN investigation team already on the ground into the site of Wednesday’s attack – strongly implies that a decision to strike may have already been made.

With such a loud and consistent drumbeat, a lack of action could be seen as an acquiescence to demands from Russia, Iran and Assad himself, who are together warning that Western action would inflame the entire Middle East.

Those threats might only embolden the allies, whose leaders see legal justification in strong action rooted in, among other interests, a moral imperative.

"This is about the large-scale, indiscriminate use of weapons that the civilized world, long ago, decided must never be used at all," a visibly angry Secretary of State John Kerry said on Monday.

The secretary's comments were intended to make a moral case for intervention, should the president choose to move forward in the coming days, a US official told The Jerusalem Post.

"Make no mistake," Kerry warned. "President Obama believes there must be accountability for those who would use the world's most heinous weapons against the world's most vulnerable people. Nothing today is more serious, and nothing is receiving more serious scrutiny."

Read more »

The Syrian Gog Machine

My Name is General Zod Gog

Does Obama even know what a spine is anymore? It's looking all Gog-y across the Middle East; it will be very interesting to see what a fully engaged West [meets East] front looks like. Ultimately all guns point to Israel, and that is when the Mercy games begin.


JPost.com:

The US and its allies concluded months ago that, since at least Christmas of last year, Syria’s nominal president Bashar Assad has tested chemical weapons intermittently on his own people.

The attacks have been small enough that the death toll from any single incident – never more than 40 – has blended in easily with your average day in Syria, where a two-year civil war between Assad and the diverse rebel groups fighting for his ouster has led to over 100,000 deaths.

US President Barack Obama vowed throughout the first year of the conflict to act if Assad dared to use chemical weapons, which are internationally banned from all battlefields. Obama’s attitude toward chemical weapons is similar to his stated position on nuclear weapons: Their proliferation and use sets a dangerous precedent and must be curtailed.

But with reports surfacing on Wednesday that just outside Damascus, in the suburb of Ghouta, Assad’s chemical weapons may have killed upward of 1,000 in a single attack, the US president’s idealist policy, his pragmatism and his distaste for Middle East wars may be approaching an important inflection point.

Obama’s reaction to the small chemical attacks was intentionally muted, and the policy more muted still. Three months after announcing that the US had indeed verified the use of sarin gas on multiple occasions in Syria through its own intelligence-gathering, the Obama administration is only now beginning to ship small arms and ammunition to Syria’s rebels.

Small arms will not shift the tide of the war, which has swayed in Assad’s favor since Hezbollah fighters from Lebanon committed fully to his cause. And since that policy was first announced in June, Assad has only been emboldened, writing off a political solution to the conflict and charging that “there are no exceptions to any means” to end the crisis – comments read widely as an allusion to his willingness to continue chemical attacks.

If confirmed, a large-scale chemical attack like Ghouta is unlikely to change the calculus of Obama or his national security team on how best to approach Syria. Nor will the Pentagon’s assessment change: US intervention would cost a fortune, upward of $1 billion a month, and there would be no guarantee of a favorable outcome. Securing Syria’s chemical weapons sites would require tens of thousands of troops – a fullscale invasion, which no one in Washington will seriously entertain.

Obama has publicly voiced concern over conducting strategic air strikes on Syrian air bases or weapons caches. They may be stocked with chemical weapons already, he says, and the US would then be complicit in releasing their toxins.

The only change might be on the diplomatic front. Western powers might successfully appeal to the better angels of Russian and Chinese leaders, and action at the UN Security Council may finally gain traction.

But ultimately Assad may have determined that the toxicity of his war is too much for the Americans to handle. If that is the case, do not expect Wednesday’s alleged incident in Ghouta to be the last gas attack of its kind.

Read more »

Remember Libya? This Is Not Libya.

Not long ago it seemed, Obama was giving himself his annual endless praise about how he personally brought down Libya [along with Obama bin Laden, the Mormon religion, etc.] and saw Gaddafi overturned, as in miraculous fashion, this was achieved without need to fire one shot. Obama would boast that to the tune of 1 billion dollars, he brought down Libya and walked one step closer to Mahdi status. Now the arena is in Syria, the Land of Gog Magog [for Islam as well] and all of a sudden, King Obama's victories by spirit over might or not a part of the agenda...why?

Because Syria is not Libya, stuff is going on, and the times are a auspicious to practically every wisdom/religion/belief/cult etc. on the planet. The stars speak, whether through a Zohar lens, X-tian lens, or whatever; needless to say, the gearing up is ready to come out firing.

On a side note, what I find interesting, is that every "empire" is experiencing the same cracks in the armor; big problems from poor leadership, and serviced by big band-aids that come super-sized with cure-all labels, co-conspired by quack-doctors, all the while ignoring the actual cure in context of the world wide web of world wide lies, cover-ups, and conspiracies.

New York Times:

The Pentagon has provided Congress with its first detailed list of military options to stem the bloody civil war in Syria, suggesting that a campaign to tilt the balance from President Bashar al-Assad to the opposition would be a vast undertaking, costing billions of dollars, and could backfire on the United States.

The list of options — laid out in a letter from the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, to the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Carl Levin of Michigan — was the first time the military has explicitly described what it sees as the formidable challenge of intervening in the war.

It came as the White House, which has limited its military involvement to supplying the rebels with small arms and other weaponry, has begun implicitly acknowledging that Mr. Assad may not be forced out of power anytime soon.

The options, which range from training opposition troops to conducting airstrikes and enforcing a no-fly zone over Syria, are not new. But General Dempsey provided details about the logistics and the costs of each. He noted that long-range strikes on the Syrian government’s military targets would require “hundreds of aircraft, ships, submarines and other enablers,” and cost “in the billions.”

General Dempsey, the nation’s highest-ranking military officer, provided the unclassified, three-page letter at the request of Mr. Levin, a Democrat, after testifying last week that he believed it was likely that Mr. Assad would be in power a year from now.

On that day, the White House began publicly hedging its bets about Mr. Assad. After saying for nearly two years that Mr. Assad’s days were numbered, the press secretary, Jay Carney, said, “While there are shifts in momentum on the battlefield, Bashar al-Assad, in our view, will never rule all of Syria again.”

Those last four words represent a subtle but significant shift in the White House’s wording: an implicit acknowledgment that after recent gains by the government’s forces against an increasingly chaotic opposition, Mr. Assad now seems likely to cling to power for the foreseeable future, if only over a rump portion of a divided Syria.

That prospect has angered advocates of intervention, including Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, who had a testy exchange with General Dempsey when the general testified before the Armed Services Committee about why the administration was not doing more to help the rebels. The plan to supply the rebels with small arms and other weaponry is being run as a covert operation by the Central Intelligence Agency, and General Dempsey made no mention of it in his letter.

On Monday, Representative Mike Rogers, a Michigan Republican who heads the House Intelligence Committee, said that despite “very strong concerns about the strength of the administration’s plans in Syria and its chances for success,” the panel had reached a consensus to move ahead with the White House’s strategy, without specifically mentioning the covert arms program. Senate Intelligence Committee officials said last week that they had reached a similar position.

A Syrian opposition leader said in an e-mail Monday night that with the Congressional reservations largely addressed, American arms would most likely begin flowing to the rebels within a few weeks. “We think August is the date,” the official said.

In an interview, Lakhdar Brahimi, the United Nations special envoy to Syria, expressed disappointment at the Congressional approval. “Arms do not make peace,” he said. “We would like to see the delivery of arms stopped to all sides.”

If ordered by the president, General Dempsey wrote, the military is ready to carry out options that include efforts to train, advise and assist the opposition; conduct limited missile strikes; set up a no-fly zone; establish buffer zones, most likely across the borders with Turkey or Jordan; and take control of Mr. Assad’s chemical weapons stockpile.

“All of these options would likely further the narrow military objective of helping the opposition and placing more pressure on the regime,” General Dempsey wrote. But he added: “Once we take action, we should be prepared for what comes next. Deeper involvement is hard to avoid.”

A decision to use force “is no less than an act of war,” General Dempsey wrote, warning that “we could inadvertently empower extremists or unleash the very chemical weapons we seek to control.”

Mr. Obama has shown no appetite for broad military engagement in Syria, and, if anything, General Dempsey’s letter underscores the president’s reluctance. Some analysts said they believed the administration’s more circumspect public language about Mr. Assad was meant to lay the groundwork for the long-term reality of a divided Syria.

“It’s not a shift, but it’s recognition that the administration’s policy goals will not be achieved during this presidency,” said Andrew J. Tabler, a senior fellow and a Syria expert at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “We’re in this for a long slog.”

White House officials said Mr. Carney was not signaling a policy shift or a change in its messaging. But the cumulative effect of comments from civilian and military leaders is unmistakable. “If nothing changes, if we don’t change our game, will he be in power a year from now?” Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, asked General Dempsey last week, referring to Mr. Assad.

“I think, likely so,” the general said.

In his letter, General Dempsey assessed the risks and benefits of different military options. But his tone was cautionary, suggesting that the Pentagon views all of these options with trepidation.

Training, advising and assisting opposition troops, he wrote, could require anywhere from several hundred to several thousand troops, and cost about $500 million a year. An offensive of limited long-range strikes against Syrian military targets would require hundreds of aircraft and warships and could cost billions of dollars over time. Imposing a no-fly zone would require shooting down government warplanes and destroying airfields and hangars. It would also require hundreds of aircraft. The cost could reach $1 billion a month.

An order to establish buffer zones to protect parts of Turkey or Jordan to provide safe havens for Syrian rebels and a base for delivering humanitarian assistance would require imposing a limited no-fly zone and deploying thousands of American ground forces.

In describing a mission to prevent the use or proliferation of chemical weapons, General Dempsey said the effort would require a no-fly zone as well as a significant campaign of air and missile strikes.

“Thousands of Special Operations forces and other ground forces would be needed to assault and secure critical sites,” he wrote, with costs well over $1 billion a month.

Read more »

Golan Heights - Neo Bavel!

Tumah: Act 1 - build tower to wage war with God
Tumah: Act 2 - build tower to wage war with God, this time in the Golan

News Today: WWIII soon to erupt in the Golan; the node to all Avodah Zara;
God's antivirus? - Moshiach 101: True Theology to Replacement Theology.
That would be called Torah, the book we are told to not forsake.


Global Research:

Israel is concerned over the Syrian War’s reach into the Golan Heights which they have been occupying since Six-Day War of 1967. The Golan Heights is a strategic territory for Israel’s security and it is an important source of its water supplies. An attack on Syria could occur if they crossed into Israel’s occupied land.

It was reported in an NBC news report that correspondent John Ray interviewed top Israeli air force officials about Israel’s monitoring of the Golan Heights of the Syrian border:

The spillover of violence from the Syrian conflict into the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights is threatening to jeopardize the decades old cease-fire between the two countries and spark a regional conflict.

A series of mighty Israeli airstrikes, apparently on weapons convoys heading from Syria towards President Bashar Assad’s allies in the Hezbollah militia in Lebanon, has shattered the fragile truce that has existed along the border since 1973

The Golan Heights, rightfully known as the Syrian Golan is a center of dispute between Syria and Israel since the 1940’s. On June 19th, 1967 Israel offered to return the Golan Heights to Syria if the Arab world would recognize Israel as a state. The Arab world refused such agreements with the Khartoum Resolution that same year. The 1967 occupation of the Golan Heights and the Upper Mount Hermon allowed Israel to seize the entire Upper Jordan River giving Israel access to the Upper Jordanian waters.

Then another conflict developed in 1973 called the Yum Kipper War or the Arab-Israeli War between Egyptian and Syrian forces who invaded the Sinai Peninsula and the Golan Heights, both territories occupied by Israel since the Six-Day War. The United States supplied Israel and the former Soviet Union supplied Egypt and Syria with weapons during the conflict as both superpowers were fighting the cold war against each other during that time. After the Yum Kipper War, Israel returned 5% of the Golan Heights to Syrian control with a demilitarized zone along the area that is declared a ceasefire zone that extends east under the United Nations Peace Keeping forces.

When an Israeli Air Force official was asked about the situation in the Golan Heights, he said “It’s the kind of thing happening more and more,” one of the uniformed escorts explained.” As he continued “We have for 40 years been training for this exact moment. And we are ready for anything,” said a pilot that can be identified under Israeli military rules only as “Major L.”

The Israeli Air Force official had no comment on whether Israel has been flying missions over Syria, “We are searching for peace, but preparing for war,’’ is all Pilot L would say.

When asked if he had already flown missions across the border, he shook his head slowly: no comment.” If Israel decided to attack Syria based on the Golan Heights, then the US and NATO would support Israel’s incursion into Syria’s borders. It would be a perfect excuse to attack Syria. The Golan Heights is a strategic military location and one of the most important water resources for the state of Israel. Israel would protect its interests with the United States as its principal supporter. The United States Secretary of State John Kerry and the United Nations under Ban-Ki Moon want the remaining UN Peacekeepers who are from the Philippines to stay. According to an Associated Press report:

The United Nations and the U.S. have separately asked the Philippines not to withdraw its more than 300 peacekeepers from the Golan Heights, warning of “maximum volatility” in the region after several other countries decided to pull out their peacekeeping forces amid escalating violence, the Philippines’ top diplomat said Wednesday.

Foreign Secretary Albert del Rosario said U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry appealed to him in recent talks. He said he told them security for the forces should be bolstered for the Philippines to consider keeping them in the volatile buffer zone between Syria and Israel.

If the UN Peacekeeping Forces pull out of the zone then Israel will send in their troops antagonizing the Syrian government.

Last month, del Rosario recommended to Philippine President Benigno Aquino III that the peacekeepers be withdrawn from the Golan Heights following two separate abductions of Filipino peacekeepers and the wounding of another in fighting between Syrian government and rebel forces.

The Philippines Foreign Secretary knows that an Israeli strike into Syria is near; therefore his recommendation to remove forces is being challenged by both the US and the UN. According to del Rosario:

“This, of course, will create a vacuum in the Golan, that separation stretch which keeps Israel away from Syria,” del Rosario said in a news conference in Manila. He said Kerry and Ban told him that if the Philippines also withdraws, that would “create maximum volatility for the area.” Albert del Rosario did stress that “Aquino said last week the changes he was looking for included additional equipment and enhanced security for the peacekeepers, and different rules of engagement. He continued “If there is no change in the conditions, it might be an undoable mission and our poor troops will be in the middle of two potentially clashing forces and they cannot defend themselves.”

Israel’s concern with the Golan Heights would allow it to launch a definitive strike that would try to cripple Syria’s military capabilities. With the Obama administration willing to supply the Anti-Assad rebels with weapons it would allow Israel to enter a full-fledged war into the Golan Heights. Any artillery shells that lands on the occupied territory would allow Israel to launch a full scale war into Syria with America’s blessing. The Obama administration would support Israel and the rebels with supplies and possibly even US troops already on Jordan’s northern border. The Golan Heights has been an area of tension that resulted in numerous conflicts between Israel and Syria for decades. The Golan Heights has numerous interests for the state of Israel that involves a military advantage over its enemies including Hezbollah and an important commodity for its citizens, water.

If Israel feels that its occupied territory is threatened, it will respond with its military power to remove the Assad government. But Syria will respond to any attack by Israel with full-force along with the Hezbollah forces based in southern Lebanon. The Golan Heights dispute can ignite World War III if the Obama administration aids the rebels on one-side allowing Israel to attack Syria on the other. It was also reported in The Jerusalem Post that the Israel Defense Forces just completed a drill combining the Air Force, Army and Naval forces against possible conflicts against Syria, Hezbollah and even Hamas in the Palestinian territory:

On Wednesday, Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon addressed an end-of –training event for IDF officers at a base in Mitzpe Ramon, “At this time, the IDF is dealing both at home and abroad, near and far, with a considerable number of fronts of uncertainty,” he said.

Ya’alon cited the Lebanese front where Hezbollah continues to arm itself and plans on harming Israeli civilians in a future conflict, and the front with Syria, “where a civil war continues to exact a heavy price of human lives, and a (civil) war is nearing our borders, placing us before a complex test that is full of significance.”

He added that there was “a front of uncertainty with the Gaza Strip, where the Hamas terrorist group continues to rule, and which has placed as its goal the destruction of the state of Israel.”

Israel is preparing to launch a war starting with Syria, Palestine and Hezbollah which will last for a very long time. Israel is the occupying force that is waging war across the Middle East. It would result in mass civilian deaths on both sides of the conflict.

X - Men babysit Jerusalem

Muslims babysit the Temple Mount

Jews babysit the Golan

While Moshiach babysits the Kan Tzippor

You can either go up or down

Also Don't Forget - We Just Turned Two!

Turning The Mundane Into Spirituality! - Through Your Name!

Read more »

Umm, Pax Judaica?

Once America pulls back [i.e. riding Obama Admin.] - and the dust settles, [hypothetically, as Moshiach is in the cards as well] - you will have the next version of Pax Britannica - Americana in Pax Judaica. Within 10 years max - Israel is the ruling state.


The Telegraph:


A revanchist Russia ships arms to her allies. Iranian revolutionary guards arrive along the eastern Mediterranean seaboard.

The world, it seems, can be a dangerous place. The escalating conflict in Syria is not merely a reminder of what nasty regimes can do. More ominously, it illustrates what can happen when America – still the world’s great power – sits back. Tyrants are emboldened. Regional bully boys, hemmed in by the international order, start to push and to probe. Perhaps it is just Barack Obama. Maybe it is the 44th president who has been sitting back, and his successor will be swifter to respond to local conflagrations. I hope so. But what if it is not? What if America’s post-Iraq blues, combined with that massive mountain of debt run up by successive White House administrations, make “sitting back” more normal for Washington? Are we ready for a world with less of the Pax Americana? The week that Tehran starts to move revolutionary guards around the Middle East, Britain contemplates yet more defence cuts.

Our aircraft carriers will be without any aircraft until at least 2018. Our navy has 13 frigates, and six destroyers in service – almost as many vessels as Venice had during the last days of that once-great maritime republic. Si vis pacem, para bellum, advised the Roman military strategist, Vegetius. If you want peace, prepare for war. Britain’s problem is not that we lack the resources to defend ourselves. We are the fourth-largest defence spender in the world.

Our trouble is that we are just not very good at converting what financial muscle we do have into military punch. And Whitehall seems to have an over extended idea of where our national interest lies. Successive governments have deliberately consolidated Britain’s defence industrial supply base, in the belief that it will deliver efficiencies. Yet in any market, when you constrain the supply, the seller sets the terms of trade. So, too, in defence.

For years, defence contractors have been able to run up higher costs in the knowledge that they can simply pass them on to the taxpayer. Even after the latest changes to defence procurement announced last week, contractors will still have guaranteed profit margins.

Despite all that the defence lobbyists tell us, there is nothing patriotic about “sovereignty of supply” if it leaves Britain unable to muster the military kit we need, when we need it. Too often the defence budget seems to be spent in the interests of a few powerful contractors, rather than in the interests of statecraft.

Before we ask whether Britain should arm Syrian rebels, we need to ask if we are doing everything we should be doing to properly arm ourselves.

From Druids to Masons to Neo Erev Rav

Read more »

When Damascus Will Cease To Be A City

Here we go...Again...

YNet:

Every Western intelligence agency estimated it would happen soon, and now, according to all indications, it has: Bashar Assad tried to reward Nasrallah and his men - who are fighting and dying for him – by transferring modern, surface-to-surface missiles that would alter the balance of power between the Lebanese Shiite group and Israel. The Jewish state, it was reported, intervened and thwarted, just as the prime minister, defense minister and IDF chief had promised it would. It is safe to assume that the arms convoy was about to leave the storage facility at the Syrian army base toward the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon when it was hit.

The attacked storage facility is apparently located in an isolated base used for training Hezbollah terrorists in the use of "deterrence-breaking" weapons and also serves as a transit station for Nasrallah's organization on the way to Lebanon. Syria has a number of such facilities in the Damascus area and in the coastal region, where most of the Alawite and Shiite-Lebanese population is located. Israeli aircraft flew over Lebanon in the past few days – mainly over south Lebanon, and even carried out simulated attacks. These flyovers were most likely meant to signal to Hezbollah and Syria: We are aware of your intentions and we will not sit idly by – as Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon warned. It seems, at least according to the American media, that the warning signals were ignored, forcing an attack on the arms convoy.

The attack itself, one can assume, was not carried out from within Lebanese territory, but from a long distance. Perhaps even from over the sea. It is known that Israel has lethal long-range weapons systems – such as the Popeye air-to-surface missile manufactured by Rafael – which allows for very accurate hits from a range of over 100 kilometers (62 miles), maybe even much more. Just so you know, Mr. Khamenei.

Among the strategic and modern weapons systems Israel said it would not allow to be transferred to Lebanon are the Scud D ballistic missiles - based on the original Russian Scud – which Syria developed with Iran's funding. These missiles can carry chemical warheads containing the advanced chemical warfare agent VX to a distance of up to 680 kilometers (423 miles). It is important to stress that according to the relatively credible reports from the Pentagon, the attacked weapons systems did not contain chemical warfare agents – but potentially they could have.

The accurate long-range missiles Assad is trying to transfer to Hezbollah present two problems for Israel: They endanger military facilities and civilians from the north almost all the way to Eilat; and they can be activated far from the border – for instance, from the Hezbollah-controlled area in Lebanon's northern Bekaa Valley – in a manner which would make it difficult for Israeli warplanes to reach them quickly and thwart the launching. The good news is that the "Arrow" system is capable of intercepting - if the number of missiles fired does not exceed a certain amount. Therefore, Hezbollah has an interest in receiving from Syria the largest amount possible of ballistic missiles and long-range rockets of all types –mainly Scud missiles.

According to foreign sources, the Assad regime had already succeeded – even before the civil war broke out – to transfer to Hezbollah in Lebanon a small number of Scud D missiles. Israel was aware but refrained from acting due to Washington's objection. It happened roughly two-and-a-half years ago: The American administration feared an Israeli attack would undermine stability in the Middle East, and the fighter jets, which were already in the air, returned to base. It is safe to assume that since then the Obama administration has changed its position on the issue.

The advanced Scud is not the only weapon capable of breaking the balance of deterrence. Other weapons systems are capable of limiting the IDF's ability to operate deep inside Lebanon should Hezbollah decide to launch a missile and rocket attack. These systems mostly include mobile, "stealth," and accurate anti-aircraft missile batteries and radar facilities which are difficult to locate – particularly the SA-17 surface-to-air missiles, which Russia recently supplied to Syria. The request for the SA-17 was made in the aftermath of the strike on Syria's nuclear reactor in 2007. Now Russia is transferring these missiles to deter NATO from operating as it did in Libya. Assad, for his part, is trying to reward Nasrallah and make things difficult for the Israeli Air Force. This is why an SA-17 battery was attacked last January as it was being transferred to from western Damascus to the Lebanese border.

Hezbollah is also after the anti-ship cruise missiles Russia sold Syria, particularly the "Yakhont" missile. Hezbollah already has in its possession obsolete Iranian-made land-to-sea missiles, such as the one that struck the Israeli missile boat "Hanit" during the Second Lebanon War. But the "Yakhont" is much more advanced and dangerous. It has a 300-kilometer (186 miles) range, it flies at a very high altitude and is equipped with the most advanced systems. The "Yakhont" can serve as a very accurate and devastating missile against targets along Israel's coastline if launched from the Syrian or Lebanese coast.

According to military journals in Russia, the "Yakhont" has the ability to zero in on a target very accurately with a GPS system. The missile has the unique ability of being able to cruise several meters above the water surface, making it difficult to detect and intercept. In short, no gas field is safe from this missile, and, should Hezbollah obtain the "Yakhont," it would make it risky for Navy vessels to sail off Lebanon's coast. Just so you know, Mr. Putin.

It is safe to assume that the recent attack targeted surface-to-surface missiles, mostly because Assad and his army do not need these missiles to fight the rebels and can therefore afford to transfer them to Nasrallah, so he could use them against Israel when the opportunity arises (from Nasrallah and Iran's standpoint). If such an opportunity does not arise, Hezbollah will be asked to return the missiles to the Syrian army, in the event that Assad's regime survives.

In addition, the Syrian regime fears that after it used nerve gas against its citizens the West and NATO may launch a military operation. Obama has already said that such an operation would not be conducted on the ground, meaning it would mostly likely be launched from the air, from bases in Turkey, for instance, as well as from the sea – from aircraft carriers and destroyers. One of the plans is to attack missiles that can be used to launch chemical weapons. In order to fend off such an attack the Syrian army would need all its modern surface-to-air batteries and every "Yakhont" launcher it currently has or can obtain from Russia. Therefore, it is unlikely that Assad will transfer vital weapons systems to Hezbollah in Lebanon at this time.

It is interesting that the reports of the recent attack came from Washington and not from sources in the region. During the attack on the SA-17 battery a few months ago, the US remained silent, but gave the impression that it was not against the operation and that it was justified, because Israel is entitled to defend itself. Obama reaffirmed this position during his visit in March. The US made it very clear it does not want "game-changing" advanced weapons to be transferred from Syria to terror elements – particularly Hezbollah. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel reiterated this position during his meeting with Ya'alon last month.

Now Washington is making sure to leak to all American media outlets that Israel attacked and what the target was. It is safe to assume that this tactic was employed because Assad's regime tried to "save face" and conceal the blow it had received, and also because the Obama administration, in accordance with its new agreements with Israel, it trying to show Syria and its supporters – Iran, Russia and China – that the US is serious when it says that "all options are on the table." The message: We stand by Israel when it protects itself.

Damascus Falls...Moshiach Comes

Read more »

Damascus Will Cease To Be A City - Oy!

Damascus

Could the plot thicken any more?!

Just after Israel bombed Syria, I was in a cab, and we began to talk about it [I like to get the local's opinions, rather than my daas as the dumb American].

He says in response to my 'will Iran hit us now?' - "Iran, no, this is the end of the World [if they do this]."

Every moment this just gets more and more complicated: Russia checking America and Israel, throw in Iran and Syria [and I guess Turkey now is coming in], the whole Middle east  and esp. Egypt.

This is nothing new obviously, but the intensity is up many levels; my Israeli friends in the North are taking it serious...the last time that happened was '66 [Lebanon War].

Point being, all the players are [still] here, acting accordingly, and it seems now everyone is on the same page: waiting.

The Voice of Russia:

Israel has become involved in the Syrian conflict. The Israeli air force has delivered a blow on a research centre on the outskirts of Damascus. Syria, Iran and Lebanese Hezbollah are threatening Israel with retaliation. Experts of the Voice of Russia say that Israel’s tactics have considerably increased the risk of a new conflict in the Middle East.

Russia has condemned Israel’s activities calling them an unprovoked attack against a sovereign state. This is a gross violation of the UN Charter and is unacceptable, whatever its motives are, the Russian Foreign Ministry’s manifest reads.

Syria’s representative in the UN has declared that Damascus reserves the right for retaliatory measures. Khaled Davud, a representative of the National Salvation Front, expressed the opinion of most Syrians in his interview with The Voice of Russia.

There are several versions of the incident. The radical Syrian opposition states that Israeli aircraft bombed the chemical weapons research centre headed by the Syrian president’s brother. The Washington Post reports that Israel did not destroy the centre but only a motorcade transporting Russian-made anti-aircraft guns to Lebanon. Another version is that the motorcade was carrying Yakhont anti-ship missiles or even Skad strategic/tactical missiles.

Israel refrains from comments but Lebanese political scientist Imad Rizk says that they are not required because explanations lie on the surface.

"The timing of the attack is symptomatic. Binyamin Netanyahu has returned to big politics. He needed that operation to consolidate the Israeli government and his own position in it. Next, a new Secretary of State, John Kerry, has been appointed in the US. The Israeli and US military held consultations the day before the bombing. It looks like the attack became the US and Israel’s joint declaration of intending to participate in the Syrian conflict. We can expect an open coordination of activities between Israel, the US and their allies in the Middle East.”

This week witnessed Israel’s first but not last blow on Syria, Vladimir Sotnikov from the Institute of Oriental Studies at the Russian Academy of Sciences believes.

“Israel will keep delivering blows on facilities or forces participating in the Syrian conflict. They would be either Islamist groups of troops loyal to Bashar al-Assad. I can foresee that as the crisis becomes worse Israel could expand its participation in such attacks. Israel fears the Islamic element in the Syrian crisis. The main reason for concern is not so much Islamists’ raising their heads in Syria but the prospect of a link between Islamists in Syria and Hamas and Hezbollah groups that are Israel’s traditional enemies. It would be a nightmare for Israel to find itself surrounded by them.

Herbie Keynon, The Jerusalem Post’s diplomatic editor, told The Voice of Russia that Israel was ready for a counterattack.

Israel’s attack against Syria took place immediately after Turkey deployed NATO Patriot missile systems on the Syrian border.

Under the circumstances, efforts on the settlement of the Syrian crisis become especially important. The main expectations are associated with special envoy of the UN and the League of Arab States Lahdar Brahimi’s new peace plan. Russia has announced that it supports his efforts. Moscow finds it reasonable to continue discussions in the Action Group for Syria which consists of the permanent members of the UN Security Council and the main regional forces.

Does Zionism Burn Until Jordan?

Read more »

Cowboys and Indians In The Middle East

There will be a straw that breaks the [Yishmael's] camel's back. This thing is getting more and more tense by the moment; Iron Dome is now in Tzfat.



USAToday.com:

Israel launched a rare airstrike inside Syria, U.S. officials said Wednesday, targeting a convoy believed to contain anti-aircraft weapons bound for Hezbollah militants in Lebanon. The attack adds a potentially flammable new element to tensions already heightened by Syria's civil war.

It was the latest salvo in Israel's long-running effort to disrupt the Shiite militia's quest to build an arsenal capable of defending against Israel's air force and spreading destruction inside the Jewish state.

Regional security officials said the strike, which occurred overnight Tuesday, targeted a site near the Lebanese border, while a Syrian army statement said it destroyed a military research center northwest of the capital, Damascus. They appeared to be referring to the same incident.

U.S. officials said the target was a truck convoy that Israel believed was carrying sophisticated anti-aircraft weapons bound for Hezbollah in Lebanon. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak about the operation.

Regional officials said the shipment included sophisticated Russian-made SA-17 anti-aircraft missiles, which if acquired by Hezbollah would be "game-changing," enabling the militants to shoot down Israeli jets, helicopters and surveillance drones. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to brief the media.

In a statement, the Syrian military denied the existence of any such shipment and said a scientific research facility outside Damascus was hit by the Israeli warplanes.

The Israeli military declined to comment. However, many in Israel worry that as Syrian President Bashar Assad loses power, he could strike back by transferring chemical or advanced weapons to Hezbollah, which is neighboring Lebanon's most powerful military force and is committed to Israel's destruction.

The airstrike follows decades of enmity between Israel and allies Syria and Hezbollah, which consider the Jewish state their mortal enemy. The situation has been further complicated by the civil war raging in Syria between the Assad regime and rebel brigades seeking his ouster.

The war has sapped Assad's power and threatens to deprive Hezbollah of a key supporter, in addition to its land corridor to Iran. The two countries provide Hezbollah with the bulk of its funding and arms.

A Syrian military statement read aloud on state TV Wednesday said low-flying Israeli jets crossed into Syria over the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights and bombed a military research center in the area of Jamraya, northwest of Damascus.

The strike destroyed the center and damaged a nearby building, killing two workers and wounding five others, the statement said.

The military denied the existence of any convoy bound for Lebanon, saying the center was responsible for "raising the level of resistance and self-defense" of Syria's military.

"This proves that Israel is the instigator, beneficiary and sometimes executor of the terrorist acts targeting Syria and its people," the statement said.

Israel and Hezbollah fought an inconclusive 34-day war in 2006 that left 1,200 Lebanese and 160 Israelis dead.

While the border has been largely quiet since, the struggle has taken other forms. Hezbollah has accused Israel of assassinating a top commander, and Israel blamed Hezbollah and Iran for a July 2012 attack on Israeli tourists in Bulgaria. In October, Hezbollah launched an Iranian-made reconnaissance drone over Israel, using the incident to brag about its expanding capabilities.

Israeli officials believe that Hezbollah's arsenal has markedly improved since 2006, now boasting tens of thousands of rockets and missiles and the ability to strike almost anywhere inside Israel.

Israel suspects that Damascus obtained a battery of SA-17s from Russia after an alleged Israeli airstrike in 2007 that destroyed an unfinished Syrian nuclear reactor.

Earlier this week, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned of the dangers of Syria's "deadly weapons," saying the country is "increasingly coming apart."

The same day, Israel moved a battery of its new "Iron Dome" rocket defense system to the northern city of Haifa, which was battered by Hezbollah rocket fire in the 2006 war. The Israeli army called that move "routine."

Syria, however, cast the airstrike in a different light, linked to the country's civil war, which it blames on terrorists carrying out an international conspiracy.

Despite its icy relations with Assad, Israel has remained on the sidelines of efforts to topple him, while keeping up defenses against possible attacks.

Israeli defense officials have carefully monitored Syria's chemical weapons, fearing Assad could deploy them or lose control of them to extremist fighters among the rebels.

President Barack Obama has called the use of chemical weapons a "red line" that if crossed could prompt direct U.S. intervention, though U.S. officials have said Syria's stockpiles still appear to be under government control.

The strike was Israel's first inside Syria since September 2007, when warplanes destroyed a site that the U.N. nuclear watchdog deemed likely to be a nuclear reactor. Syria denied the claim, saying the building was a non-nuclear military site.

Syria allowed international inspectors to visit the bombed site in 2008, but it has refused to allow nuclear inspectors new access. This has heightened suspicions that Syria has something to hide, along with its decision to level the destroyed structure and build on its site.

In 2006, Israeli warplanes flew over Assad's palace in a show of force after Syrian-backed militants captured an Israeli soldier in the Gaza Strip.

And in 2003, Israeli warplanes attacked a suspected militant training camp just north of the Syrian capital, in response to an Islamic Jihad suicide bombing in the city of Haifa that killed 21 Israelis.

Syria vowed to retaliate for both attacks but never did.

In Lebanon, which borders both Israel and Syria, the military and the U.N. agency tasked with monitoring the border with Israel said Israeli warplanes have sharply increased their activity in the past week.

Israeli violations of Lebanese airspace are not uncommon, and it was unclear if the recent activity was related to the strike in Syria.

Syria's primary conflict with Israel is over the Golan Heights, which Israeli occupied in the 1967 war. Syria demands the area back as part of any peace deal. Despite the hostility, Syria has kept the border quiet since the 1973 Mideast war and has never retaliated for Israeli attacks.

In May 2011, only two months after the uprising against Assad started, hundreds of Palestinians overran the tightly controlled Syria-Israeli frontier in a move widely thought to have been facilitated by the Assad regime to divert the world's gaze from his growing troubles at home.

 This exercise is one shot from going Global.

YnetNews:

Russia said on Thursday it was very concerned about reports of an Israeli attack in Syria and that any such action, if confirmed, would amount to unacceptable military interference in the war-ravaged country.

The remarks were issued as Hezbollah called on the international community to condemn the alleged strike.

"If this information is confirmed, then we are dealing with unprovoked attacks on targets on the territory of a sovereign country, which blatantly violates the UN Charter and is unacceptable, no matter the motives to justify it," the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

Sources told Reuters on Wednesday that Israeli warplanes had bombed a convoy near Syria's border with Lebanon, apparently targeting weapons destined for Hezbollah in what some called a warning to Damascus not to arm Israel's Lebanese enemy.

Syrian state television accused Israel of bombing a military research center at Jamraya, between Damascus and the nearby border. Syrian rebels disputed that, saying their forces had attacked the site.

Russia has been trying to shield Syrian President Bashar Assad from international pressure to end the civil war against opposition forces that has ravaged the country over 22 months and killed an estimated 60,000 people. Moscow has repeatedly spoken against any foreign interference in Syria, especially military action.

'Attack typical of Israel's criminal ways' Meanwhile, the Hezbollah terror organization released a statement condemning the "Israeli attacks on the scientific research center in Syria." The statement said that "the attack is in line with Israel's aggressive and criminal ways and was made in accordance to a policy which attempts to prevent any Arab or Muslim force to develop its military and technological capabilities."

In its statement the Shiite terror organization claimed that "the attack exposes the background to what has been going on in Syria for years, and the criminal intention to destroy Syria and its army, and undermine its central role on the resistance front."

It also said: "The attack requires wide-scale condemnation from the international community and the Arab and Muslim states."

Nevertheless, it also claimed that "we are accustomed to the international community swallowing its tongue and remaining silent, not condemning or taking a stand when Israel is the aggressor."

Hassan Nasrallah's organization also expressed solidarity with the Syrian people, the Syrian leadership and the Syrian army.

They said, in an implied message to the rebel forces, that "some elements should be aware of the severity of the attack against Syria."

"This aggression should lead to a re-examination of their stance and to adopt political dialogue as the only basis to a solution meant to end the shedding of Syrian blood, in order to keep Syria and protect its role in the fight against the enemies."

Read more »